Skip to main content
10:00 pm
jose ethics commission and let them hear the complaint. you shouldn't be involved in it. you are too close to your own executive director to hear and adjudicate this matter without a perception of a conflict of interest. when you deliberate this when you put it on your next agenda i'm going to be back here asking you to put it on another jurisdiction so i can handleage ethical point of view on both of these cases. speaker: i believe i heard a suggestion that the city attorney provide the precedent for your hearing a case
10:01 pm
involving discipline of your own executive director. if the city attorney provides you with that information i would hope it's made available to the public as well. i think it's important. thank you. speaker: johnson i quickly wanted to say that um, please take into consideration that it's not just a member of the staff. this is more of the executive director who is managing all of the staff and i think that that leads to a bit of a conflict of interest for you to decide to dismiss it or not and to send it over to a different ethics commission. the city attorneys office i'll say is technically supposed to have ethical walls,
10:02 pm
fire walls, but there was some question as to whether our own deputy city attorney for the task force could help us with some of these ethics commission matters. that leads me to believe that there could be a conflict. i encourage you to send it to a different jurisdiction based on the fact that it is a department head managerial employee. thank you. speaker: david, i do recall the case and i don't actually recall the case but i do recall the executive director, the oakland commission did perform this kind of recommendation on a prior manner when the staff was conflicted and i think that's the case that was referred to. with regard to these two items i believe they
10:03 pm
are properly before you. i do believe that you followed and the staff followed the procedures for what happens whether it's a conflict and until we have rights to handle sunshine refederals these appear to have been handled consistent with the regulars for handling investigation matters so it appears to be procedurally you seem to be in a good place and we'll deal with that in future meeting. thank you. speaker: one other thing i'd like to clarify for the public who think that i decided at the beginning that we were going to move this and didn't notify you until now, that is not the case. i did not have an opportunity to look at it until the break realizing how sub stan tiff it was i think i need to study it more
10:04 pm
and i apologize again for the delay but to me that's a better course than to do it on the fly so again my apologizes. the next item on the agenda is closed session. do we need a vote to hold it over? we're holding it over, right? we're good. okay. the next item on the agenda is a closed session how pursuent to section c dash section [indiscernible] can you anticipate how long
10:05 pm
this will take so we can judge if we should stay for those of us interested in the following items. speaker: i was going to say three hours but i don't think it should take long. is there a motion for me to close session? all in favor, i. everyone: i. speaker: okay.
10:06 pm
10:07 pm
10:08 pm
10:09 pm
10:10 pm
10:11 pm
10:12 pm
10:13 pm
10:14 pm
10:15 pm
10:16 pm
10:17 pm
10:18 pm
10:19 pm
10:20 pm
10:21 pm
10:22 pm
10:23 pm
10:24 pm
10:25 pm
10:26 pm
10:27 pm
10:28 pm
10:29 pm
speaker: we're back if public session. the complaints are confidential. speaker: did i do that wrong? speaker: is there a motion? speaker: so moved

September 30, 2012 10:00pm-10:30pm PDT

TOPIC FREQUENCY Us 2, Johnson 1, The Oakland 1, I. 1
Network SFGTV
Duration 00:30:00
Scanned in San Francisco, CA, USA
Source Comcast Cable
Tuner Channel 89 (615 MHz)
Video Codec mpeg2video
Audio Cocec ac3
Pixel width 528
Pixel height 480
Sponsor Internet Archive
Audio/Visual sound, color